EUCHARISTIC MUSING

MORNING QUESTION:
In the John 6 Bread of Life Discourse, did you know that the word ‘eat’ used was an Aramaic slang word specifically meaning TO EAT SOMEONE’S FLESH? A scandalous, forbidden practice!

THE LISTENERS RESPONSE
That slanderous use (which appeared to the listener as cannibalism) caused a division of followers, many of whom left. But when Jesus asked if the disciples were going to leave also, St. Peter, always spokesman for the 12…and in spite of likely not totally understanding why Jesus would suggest such a thing…said ‘to whom shall we go? You have the words of life’

LOGICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE LITERAL
1. In all other difficult teachings, Jesus would privately explain to his disciples the parable or symbolic meaning. No such explanation was offered. Why? It was a literal statement [See final section].
2. Would Christ, who was Truth Incarnate, have allowed followers to walk away with such a false notion? Not likely. He would have more likely explained that the path to having life in him was AKIN to eating his flesh and drinking his blood [ex: “The kingdom of God is LIKE this…]

FAST FORWARD TO THE UPPER ROOM
The explanation came in the form of the Eucharist, as consecrated by Christ’s holy hands, and after this night of Holy Orders, to continue ‘in persona Christi’ by all ordained apostolic priests. Did the disciples have an Aha Moment? Hard to say. But no one questioned the verb use of THIS IS MY BODY, THIS IS MY BLOOD.

If you had been there….What might you have thought from John 6 to the Last Supper?